English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=107692

only now in countries in western europe are people being told the truth in who actully won world war 2.The western front was nothing compared to the eastern front.Even the germans admitted after the war that it was the soviet union who won world war 2.You could fit over 30 normandy beach landings on the eastern front,thats how huge it was.The brave red army soldiers had to fight house to house, hand to hand in every city which the nazi's occupied in the soviet union,that one of the reasons why the soviets lost so many brave soldiers fighting the nazis.The whole truth is, the germans are deployed over 3 million of it's best waffen ss troops and armour and lufttafe on the eastern front, while letting conscripts to fight on western front.The bravery and courage of the red army soldiers is what caused the defeat of nazi germany.what do people think,thank god for the soviets who freed europe from the nazis.

2007-03-21 21:52:46 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

15 answers

the world knows what actully happened and who won world war 2, it was the soviet union.One thing that makes me and the world sick is the nazi's that fled from the soviets were wellcomed into the countires such as u.s.a and it's allies and were given passports and new names to hide and live in thier countries, instead of being tried for the killing, sufferng they caused to the people of the soviet union.This only says one thing, these countires that harboured the nazi's are them selves evil nazis.

2007-03-21 21:58:56 · answer #1 · answered by w.m.d's_bro 3 · 2 2

WW2 was not won because of the "courage" of red army. It was won because Hitler made mistakes. BIG mistakes. His first big mistake was that he made the final choices and he did not listen to his military advisors, his Generals. Then by attacking the soviet union while having already an open front in the west.Then he made another mistake by sending troops in Africa.He was so enraged against the communists that he couldn't wait a couple more years.I think he got more chances to occupy UK in the Sea Lion operation than to conquer the HUGE land of the Soviet Union in Barbarossa operation. And he underestimated the war capacity of the Russians.

Indeed, if we exclude the Allied powers( Allied powers do NOT include the Soviet Union, like many might think) a advanced equipped Wehrmacht would have crushed the bigger, but not that well equipped Red Army. We all know now that, soon after Hitler attacked URSS, more than three thirds of the Wehrmacht were fighting on the eastern front and Hitler had to take valuable troops and equipment from the West to send to the troops fighting on the East.

You say: "thank god for the soviets who freed europe from the nazis". But let's not forget URSS was helped by US , was given lots of money and equipment( tanks, etc) and the german armies who fought on the eastern front were ill-equipped for the russian winter, had low morale and their supply lines were, with each mile forward, extended while the russian supply lines were getting shorter.

we may say that the soviet union won the war, but without the allied help, the war would have been much longer.

2007-03-22 06:04:16 · answer #2 · answered by tigerhawkro 2 · 0 1

There are many answers to this question and lots of them are ifs and buts, what is in no doubt is the mistakes Hitler made.
If you study the war on the Eastern front Hitler dug his own grave with the treatment of the population at the start of the war he did have a lot of ethnic populations on his side and he could have used this to far greater effect.
The trouble is the Nazi mentality was never going to do that.
From a military view the war on the Eastern front was in the balance almost up to the battle of Kursk Field Marshall Von Manstien, laid the prequisits for at very least a stalemate with the Russians but Hitlers stubbon idea of no retreat even for tactical manouver robbed Germany of the chances of using the oppertunities that were open to them.
What must be said that by 1943 everyone knew that the Nazi thing was over but by then Germany was so deep in Hitlers war that there could have been no political settlement, you have to hand it to the more level headed german officers and their troops the way they fought horrific battle like nothing ever seen in the wast to stem the red tide.
It was a great source of pain to Stalin and his commie bunch that German troops fought so hard against Russia whilst the conduct in the west was much more sedate.
And it was these German soldiers that in effect caused Russia's total fear of Germany for many years to come, the Eastern front was a very close run thing up to the point of German exhaustion in the replacement army and weapons maufacture.

2007-03-22 07:17:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes I am glad Stalin threw away his men's lives with reckless disregard for strategy and tactics. The British, Canadians and Americans preferred to use strategy, tactics and overwhelming fire-power to bleed the enemy and spare their soldiers lives.
The Soviets did not liberate Europe. To call Stalin a liberator is like calling Genghis Khan or Atilla a liberator.

2007-03-22 08:04:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Of course, red army soldiers had family too, who felt their loss in much the same way as allied troops' relatives, however ex soviet bloc countries will not agree with the assertation that communism was a great experiment, it ruined lives in its own innovative way, socially politically, economically.

2007-03-22 05:03:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes, thank god for the reds, who imposed brutal communist satellite states in Eastern Europe to act as buffer zones. God bless the Reds for dishonoring their treaty with us to fight the Japanese in the Pacific. And god bless Stalin for murdering more people than the war did in the name of the People's republic. Whoever you are, read a book before you get all preachy about the commies. Tool.

2007-03-22 04:55:37 · answer #6 · answered by indieforcutie 3 · 2 0

Wasn't the extreme weather and the poorly equipt German soldiers being rushed there a factor and are you trying to say that the Russians would have won if the Allies(Britain, America and the others) hadn't been involved, bit of a poorly thought out question is what I think!

2007-03-22 05:07:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

they were brave without a doubt, but their officers were order to shoot them if they turned and ran away from the Nazi's, so i guess that's a lose, lose situation, Don't forget Starlin had a lot of his officers executed as he considered them a threat to him, it was so bad they had no good officers to lead them, that's one of the reason so many Russian soldiers died when German invaded Russia. I don't think you can Honestly say that it was all down to Russia, Hitler lost the plot and wasted so many of his elite troops by make military mistakes.

2007-03-22 05:35:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

the russians won the war for us.but nobody ever wins a war in reality.it is totally wrong to say anyone wins a war,how do you justify millions of people murdered.and that includes the illegal war on iraq.which i can tell you now in your terms,we have already lost.

2007-03-22 10:53:45 · answer #9 · answered by earl 5 · 0 0

This is common knowledge in Europe, probably not so well known in USA.

2007-03-22 09:20:25 · answer #10 · answered by Huh? 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers